Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (April 13, 1964)
Reversing Tactics Mr Goldnuirk’s Plan to Up wot Rightists As Frightening As Rightists Themselves John Goldmark is a man who knows what harassment and intimidation means. The former Washington state legislator was the object of Birch Society attacks when he sought reelection to the Washing ton House of Representatives in 1962. Bleating lunatic fringe voices tried to iden tify Goldmark with the Communist Party. But unlike so many private citizens and public officials who have been discredited by the far right, Goldmark fought back. And he won. Earlier this year Goldmark was awarded a $40,000 libel judgment against several individuals who tried to smear him in the 1962 campaign. Friday night John Goldmark spoke at the University. Unfortunately he didn’t focus his remarks on the trial, but deli vered a more generalized lecture on the dangers of the radical right. We were dis appointed that Goldmark devoted so little of his time to the intimate human interest details and implications of the celebrated trial. Instead he chose to string together the well-worn liberal cliches about ultra conservatism. And John Goldmark is some thing less than an authority on the organi zation. development and operation of right wing political action groups. Our concern with Goldmark’s lecture however does not lie with the hackneyed redundancies which he uttered, but with his plan of action for rooting out Birchers and other extremists. Goldmark proposed the establishment of community citizens groups for the express purpose of exposing members of the luna tic fringe. As a matter of fact Goldmark’s proposal which would have citizens band ing together to observe and study the right’s operations would probably lead to the same kind of activity which the far right conducts. After all, the right wingers thought they were doing the same thing to “dangerous leftists’’ when they started their attacks on Goldmark. Mr. Goldmark and others who propose counter conspiracy groups would do w'ell to reevaluate their efforts and compare them to the activities of rightist groups. Goldmarks own state ment “I’ve seen in our country friend set against friend and neighbor set against neighbor” merits some thoughts in a dif ferent light. Citizen’s counter-conspiracy groups developed for the express purpose of spying on the radical right could be just as malicious and dangerous as the rightist groups which are spying on the radical left. Mr. Goldmark’s proposal is pretty short sighted. If he would only recall his own intimidation at the hands of the radical right, he would realize how really danger ous his plan of action really is. Meeting of the Minds There was a high-level “meeting of the minds” last week when President Flem ming met with nearly 150 so-called student leaders to discuss “The University of Ore gon Today and Tomorrow.” The dinner meeting was a unique opportunity for stu dents to express their ideas on problems facing the campus, particularly the contro versial student conduct code. There has been considerable lip service given to freedom of expression when, on some occasions, students have felt that there is a barrier between themselves and University administrators and faculty mem bers. Too often students have been reluc tant to accept President Flemming’s “open door” policy of seeing students without appointments on Friday afternoons. And the free speech platform hasn’t been the most popular way of airing one's views. If all else fails, a student can write a letter to the editor. But a lot of people don’t take letters too seriously. The student-leader dinner seems to fill a gap in the President’s “channels of com munication.” It provides for a discussion between the University’s chief administra tor and student leaders. Psychologically, it Footnote An informational letter from the Office of Institutional Research, Washington, D.C., this week features Oregon Chancellor Roy Lieuallen in its “Quote of Note” column. Chancellor Lieuallen said, “Our higher educational system in Oregon will within the next decade be rocked with a 70 per cent increase in numbers of students . . . There is no immediate solution to this problem except to finance higher education to meet the challenge of the future. The problem won’t just go away if we don’t look at it—there is no panacea, no miracle drug or push button automation that will enable us to educate twice the number of students for the same amount of money ... It may be many years before we get any return for our investment in the education of young people as they come along—and as they keep coming along—but this return will be tremendous and lasting if we do our duty now.” just appears easier to complain about re cent policy decisions after munching on a chicken dinner than in the formal atmos phere of a carpeted office in Johnson Hall. Perhaps the best way to a student’s heart is through his stomach. This interchange between the leader and the masses is a refreshing change from the old policy of handing down decisions with out allowing the student body to properly express itself. The president has already demonstrated his willingness to work with elected student representatives when, at the request of the student body president, he took steps towards correcting a hastily made decision by another administrator. Although President Flemming can’t be expected to do everything he is asked by special-interest groups, it’s vital that he keeps as many avenues of approach as pos sible open so he can put his policy deci sions in their proper perspective. The pres ident said the dialogue would set a prece dent for future dinners. We certainly hope so. Council and the Cross Alpha Phi Omega service fraternity act ed wisely in withdrawing its request to place a new concrete cross on Skinner’s Butte . The bitter hassle and public debate which followed the fraternity’s proposal did much to mar its reputation as a service group. It will probably be some time before the group has a favorable image in the Eugene community. The withdrawal of the request takes the City Council out of the hot seat since they need not make a final decision on the matter at their meeting to day. We suppose that the City Council will breath a sigh of relief and forget about the whole issue. If this is the case it is unfortu nate because the question of the use of pub lic land for religious purposes ought to be resolved. We can understand the Council’s reluctance, for it certainly is not pleasant to be on the firing line of the civil libertians or the fundamentalists. The policy question should be discussed and resolved. It seems to us that this is the Council’s responsibili ty. We hope they meet it. Herblock T /Mormir-'MAj KAktr PRejUPlCtT' I .. .sou r>*i kh f WACfc PRf JUOlCfc. I hits4/. cJJf I -4- J r»-ir Hrotherhocxl Letters to the Editor Librarian Replies Emerald Editor: With reference to Mr Nar esh R. Madhok's communica tion in the “Letters to the Edi tor" column of April 8, 1 wish to make two comments: (1) Unfortunately, we have some immature and irresponsi ble individuals in the Univer-, sity community who do need to be reminded by means of a check that books are supposed to be signed for before they are tak en from the Library. Mature and responsible individuals realize this situation and willingly co operate in the necessary check ing procedure. (2) W'e do not enjoy inspect ing books and briefcases. How ever, we deny this activity is an implicit charge of the theft It is a necessity procedure wide ly used in libraries throughout the world and, contrary to Mr. Madhok’s statement, it has yield ed results locally. One further point—the open access policy which gives stu dents the privilege of using the book collection with a minimum of controls is squarely based on the idea of maturity and res ponsibility. Sometimes it seems we are mistaken. Perhaps Mr. Madhok would like to see some of the periodicals and books which have had pages cut from them by “mature and responsi ble individuals.” Carl W. Hint/., University Librarian. ‘Red Hot Answer’ Emerald Editor: In response to your editorial of April 8, concerning the “Red Hot Professor” contest, I would like to call attention to falacies within the article. The ob jects of the contest were to pro mote better relations between the students and the faculty, to give students a chance to give recognition to their favorite pro fessors, to give the faculty an opportunity to participate in a way that the majority of the stu dent body would enjoy, and most important, to raise money for WUS week through student con tributions. No professor was under any obligation to participate in the doney basketball game and each finalist was called and allow ed to forego this part of his duties. Also, we were not in terested in getting faculty mem bers to donate “large sums of money in the name of opposing candidates.” We never asked the faculty for any money. In fact, no faculty members were seen voting at the polls. In addi tion, this contest was not meant to be taken seriously but sim ply as a fun way to raise money for WUS week. In answer to your article of April 9. the reason for only 6 finalists was not la-cause of the professors' lack of interest be cause the committee cut the number down because of the outstanding number of votes these professors received in re lation to the rest. We realize that there were weaknesses in this contest, but that is to be expected with any new activity It is very difficult to involve faculty members in student activities successfully. In the future, when you write up an article about a student activity, I think it would be a good idea if you get your in formation from the committee in charge of that particular activ ity. Judy Ann Coltstri, Co-Chrmn. Ited Hot Professor Contest. • • * Get Those Courts! Emerald Editor: I have spent the past four years trying to get lights on the tennis courts and have been very successful in my efforts - until I ask for money; it seems that there is no money unless you want to use it over a thou sand miles aw-ay! I think that all students realize the need for more opportunity to play ten nis. Last year, the class of 1!)<>5 had a very successful financial year. It looks as if this year (Conlimu'd on payc 3) OREGON DAILY EMERALD The Oregon Daily Emerald in publiched twice in September and five day* a week during the academic year, except during examination and vacation periods by the Student Publications Hoard of the Uni versity of Oregon. Entered as second class matter at the post office, Eugene, Oregon. Subscription rates $5 per year; $2 per term. Opinions expressed on the editorial page are those of the Emerald and do not pre tend to represent the opinion of the ASUO or the University. EVERETTB DENNIS, Editor JIM SPEER, Business Manager JANET GOETZE, Managing Editor MARIE FORRESTER, Advertising Manager RON COWAN. News Editor CATHY NEVILLE, Academic Affairs Editor DICK RICHARDSON, Associate Editor JIM FKAKE Assistant Managing Editor JO GRISWOLD, DAVE JORDAN, Assistant News Editors RAY MAST, Sports Editor JOE BERGER, Associate Managing Editor GEORGE BIGHAM. Photo Editor CHUCK BEGGS, Entertainment Editor MARY STAMP, PHYLLIS ELVING, STEVE GRELN, Associate News Editors Editorial Board : Evcrette Dennis, Ron Cowan, Janet Goettc, Doug Ragen, Dick Richardson, Dave Sands, Jerry Utti, Ray Mast. Pam Pashkowaki, Cathy Neville, Pat Holt, .Simeon Crowther, Doug Combs, Joe Berger, Jim Prake, Larry Derr, Lynn Mascall and Tim Pennington.
